Category: Health Care

No comments

What the Court Did, Why, and What it Means for Politics and Health Care Policy

  By Health Care

We got very good news from the Supreme Court today. There are no constitutional barriers to the ACA going fully into effect. The exchanges, subsidies for insurance and the expansion of Medicaid will provide affordable insurance for over thirty million people who don’t have it now. Over a hundred million people will be protected from losing their insurance or paying more if they have pre-existing conditions or are older or women. And the provisions already in place—that make preventive care free, that reduce pharmaceutical costs for seniors, that enable people 26 and younger to stay on the insurance of the parents—will remain in place. This is all great news. And it would not have happened without all the hard work you did in support of what became the ACA. That work didn’t stop after the legislation was passed. As I explain more below, the decision today was in no small… Continue reading

No comments

Two Thoughts in Advance of the Supreme Court Decision

  By Health Care

Can we progressives not attack each other after the decision? I’m going to be writing more about the ACA and the Court after we hear the decision. But here is one plea in advance of the decision: can we progressives not get in a circle and start shooting at one another? That means, can the single payer folks not lead off with “if Obama only had pushed single payer through Congress we wouldn’t have to worry about the Court today?” Everyone who pays any attention to Congress knows that single payer had no chance in 2009-2010 and it does the progressive cause no good to make up stories about what is politically possible and what is not. More importantly we need to unite against the enemy, which is not the supporters of Obamacare but the corporate conservatives who, if they get their way today, are going to go after Medicare… Continue reading

No comments

Send Tim Holden Packing on Tuesday

  By 2012, Health Care

Voters in the 17th Congressional District in Pennsylvania have an opportunity to do something really important, not just for themselves, but for the entire country: defeat Congressman Tim Holden. who represents the Republican wing of the Democratic party.   It is obviously important to the 17th District to have a member of Congress who actually support their interests, not those of the corporate rich. And it’s important to the Democratic Party and the country as a whole to rid ourselves of members of Congress who fail to do the minimal in standing up for the ideals of our party. Defeating such members will send a critical message throughout the Democratic Caucus: Democratic members of Congress are accountable to us. And, as I explain below, defeating Tim Holden will remove from office a whining, gutless, dishonest example of the American politician at his worst. Continue reading

One Comment

Stacie Ritter, Obamacare, and Me

  By About me, Health Care, Progressive Politics

This is a story mostly about what Obamacare means to my colleague and friend Stacie Ritter. But is not just a story about a woman whose family has and will continue to benefit from the Affordable Care Act. It’s also about how the struggle for health care for her family has changed Stacie and made her into one of the most important health care activists in Pennsylvania and in the country as a whole. And it’s also a story about me, because in my four years of work as a health care activist and as Director of Health Care for American Now in Pennsylvania no one has inspired me more than Stacie. Meeting Stacie Ritter I met Stacie almost by chance in early September 2009. She was scheduled to speak in support of health care reform in Carlisle, Pennsylvania at an event organized by the premier labor and progressive radio… Continue reading

One Comment

Why is This Mandate Different From All Other Mandates?

  By Constitutional Law and Civil Liberties, Health Care

One of the central concerns that conservatives have about the individual mandate is that it would lead to unlimited federal authority over our individual lives. If Congress can require us to purchase health insurance, conservatives sometimes ask, can’t it require us to purchase cars or broccoli or cell phones? Defenders of the mandate have been so concerned to show that it is justifiable under the Commerce and Necessary and Proper clauses—and there the argument seems quite straightforward—that we have not been focused enough on making sure that we don’t prove too much. And that’s partly because we tend to be political progressives and are not as worried as conservatives about limiting federal power over our economic lives. We are not libertarians, after all. While we progressive are adamant about defending civil liberties, we generally don’t believe that there is a general right to economic liberty. And thus, unless government forces… Continue reading

No comments

The Founding Fathers and Health Care

  By Constitutional Law and Civil Liberties, Health Care

Revised version of an article published in The Philadelphia Public Record, March 15, 2012 under the title The Founding Fathers and Health Care Later this month the Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). There is a narrow question concerning the Commerce Clause and the individual mandate. Most lawyers who have thought about the issue or read the decision of conservative judge Laurence Silberman understand that the mandate is constitutional. There is also a larger debate about not just the ACA but much else the government does. Contemporary right wingers say that the Federal government has gone far beyond its constitutional limits in regulating, taxing and subsidizing economic activity. Libertarians such as Ron Paul argue that the Founders wanted to create a “limited government” that protects our “liberty.” They suppose that by “limited government” the Founders meant what libertarians mean today, a government that does… Continue reading

No comments

Catholics, Contraception and President Obama

  By Health Care, Women and Health Care

The Catholic Church claims that President Obama’s decision to require health insurance plans to include contraception violates its First Amendment right to freedom of religion. What Freedom of Religion Means This claim rests a mistaken understanding of that freedom. The freedom of religion clause protects our right to practice our own religion. That means the government cannot enact laws that aim at interfering with religious beliefs or practices. But the First Amendment has never been understood to grant us a general exemption from legislation that aims at a legitimate secular purpose even if it conflicts with our religion. Congress and state legislatures have granted institutions that perform religious services and teach religious doctrine limited exemptions from general laws. A church may give preference to members of its own denomination in hiring, even for non-clerical positions. Recently the Supreme Court ruled that the Americans with Disability Act does not apply to… Continue reading

No comments

Fighting for Our Health

  By Health Care

During the 18 months of the Health Care for America Now (HCAN) campaign in support of what became the Affordable Care Act, I gave over a hundred speeches to thousands of activists who were working us in Pennsylvania. I frequently concluded my speeches this way: “Who is most responsible for the most popular domestic program in our history, Social Security? (Someone would, of course, shout out ‘Franklin Roosevelt.’ Or a history buff would say Senator Wagner.) No, that’s not really true. Franklin Roosevelt was President when Social Security was enacted and his support was crucial. But he came late to supporting it. Long before he did, the Townsend Movement made retirement security an issue of national importance. The Townsend movement held meetings, just like this one, in living rooms, in church basements, in fire houses, in union halls, and in public libraries. It never brought 100,000 people to a rally… Continue reading

No comments

The Imaginarium of Pat Toomey and Kevin Ferris

  By Federal Budget, Health Care, Taxation

Today in the Inquirer, Kevin Ferris channels PA Senator Pat Toomey, who has been providing a Republican spin on the failure of the Super Committee. In the imagniarium of Pat Toomey and Kevin Ferris, the Senator courageously broke with fellow Republicans to propose a balanced, bi-partisan deal that would combine $450 million in tax increases along with $750 million in budget cuts to meet the Super Committee’s ten year goal. In rejecting this proposal, President Obama and the Democrats showed that they don’t truly want a balanced bipartisan solution to the deficit problem. This is what the proposal looks like when you take off the funny glasses. Toomey’s proposal would have raised revenue slightly—no more than $45 billion a year. But most of that increase would have come from the middle class not the rich. Toomey proposed to reduce the marginal tax rates for everyone by 20%. However, the absolute… Continue reading

No comments

Democrats threaten Medicaid, Too

  By Health Care, Published op-eds

Originally appeared in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Tuesday, July 05, 2011 After a public outcry stopped the Republican plan to radically transform Medicare, a new threat to our health care is coming, this time from a surprising direction. In the negotiations with Republicans about raising the debt ceiling, the Obama administration has proposed new rules for federal matching of state expenditures for Medicaid — we call it “medical assistance” in Pennsylvania — and CHIP, the Children’s Health Insurance Program. These rules are troubling. They would lead to substantial cuts in federal support programs that provide health care to low-income children and parents, people with disabilities and senior citizens, including the 62 percent of seniors in Pennsylvania whose nursing home care is paid for by medical assistance. States now receive different matching rates for different groups of people. The federal government pays 50 percent to 75 percent of the costs for people currently… Continue reading